Read the latest Entertainment news, on Archyde. Stay informed with global economic updates and expert insights.
A year after the Trump administration began dismantling the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), significant cuts to foreign assistance have been initiated, affecting programs previously deemed lifesaving. According to an internal email from the State Department, the administration plans to end all humanitarian funding in seven African nations whereas redirecting assistance in nine others as part of a “responsible exit.” This shift marks a controversial phase in U.S. Foreign aid policy, with critics raising alarms about the humanitarian consequences.
The seven countries set to lose U.S. Aid include Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Malawi, Mali, Niger, Somalia, and Zimbabwe. These nations were previously up for renewal of aid programs through September 2026 but will now see their funding allowed to expire. The State Department’s email cited a lack of “strong nexus between the humanitarian response and U.S. National interests” as the rationale for these cancellations.
The decision to cut aid aligns with the administration’s broader “America First” strategy, where aid is not necessarily allocated based on humanitarian demand but rather on perceived returns for U.S. Interests. This has raised concerns, as over 6.2 million people in these seven nations are currently facing extreme or catastrophic conditions, according to the United Nations.
Context of the Cuts
Previously, the Trump administration had already canceled the entire aid packages for Afghanistan and Yemen, claiming that terrorists were diverting resources. The internal email from February 12, 2026, further emphasized that the new cuts made no such claims regarding the seven countries losing aid.
In contrast, the nine countries that may receive redirected funding include Ethiopia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Central African Republic, Kenya, Mozambique, Nigeria, Uganda, South Sudan, and Sudan. The State Department has begun signing health-financing agreements with some of these governments, focusing on strengthening health systems and addressing infectious diseases, though critics argue that these agreements do not address the urgent hunger and displacement crises.
Impacts on Humanitarian Efforts
As the U.S. Winds down its involvement through USAID, aid organizations are left grappling with the implications. For instance, humanitarian projects in the seven countries will no longer receive American taxpayer dollars via the UN’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). The U.S. Has previously contributed significantly to this global humanitarian pool, but policy changes mean that funds will now only be allocated to a selective list of countries.
According to a spokesperson for OCHA, any American contributions to the organization must be spent within six months of allocation. This new guideline raises concerns among humanitarian experts regarding the effectiveness and timeliness of aid distribution, as the specific recipients and timing of these funds remain unclear.
Future of U.S. Foreign Aid Policy
Under the leadership of Elon Musk, the Department of Government Efficiency helped purge 83% of American foreign aid from January to March last year. The Trump administration has classified many programs as wasteful, aiming to retain only those it views as lifesaving. However, this definition has been criticized for being overly restrictive.
Funding for programs that combat tuberculosis or assist those who are chronically hungry, rather than starving, has been canceled. Meanwhile, stabilization centers for the most severely malnourished children have largely survived the cuts, albeit inconsistently. A former senior State Department official indicated that only programs where immediate life-or-death consequences were evident were deemed worthy of funding.
Despite assurances from the Trump administration that lifesaving aid would continue, reports indicate that conditions in countries like Somalia, which is facing a severe drought, are worsening. Humanitarian organizations like Doctors Without Borders have reported alarming increases in child mortality linked to the funding cuts. In fact, deaths among severely malnourished children under five have reportedly risen by 44% in regions affected by these cuts.
What Comes Next?
The future of foreign aid under the current administration remains uncertain. With the World Food Program planning to cut rations for those facing famine by 70%, the humanitarian landscape could deteriorate further. Organizations like Alight have already begun closing health facilities and laying off staff due to funding shortages, leaving vulnerable populations without essential services.
As the administration continues to reshape U.S. Foreign aid policy, the implications for millions of people in desperate need of assistance are alarming. The next steps will be crucial in determining whether humanitarian needs will be prioritized over geopolitical considerations.
For those concerned about these developments, further engagement and advocacy may be necessary to ensure that humanitarian aid continues to reach those who need it most. Your thoughts and shares on this issue could facilitate raise awareness and drive change.
